Genetic preposition or environmental?

[Project Blaze]

I've been wondering lately... so, I'm asking this: Are people predisposed to act a certain way, or do they grow up in a certain "environment" and become/change because of something like that? I'm basically asking if people are born leaning towards the darker side of life, or if it's the way they grow up.

I've got some "personal interest" in this subject too, so let me know what you think please.

[LiNuX]

It's all conditioning.

I'm sure people are born with certain genes that make them act in certain ways but most of it is how they are brought up. And with conditioning, you can overwrite certain behavior in genes.

[jango]

The only word I find difficult in the 'Nature or Nurture' debate is the 'or' tbh .. environment is a huge influence ofc, but genetics do play a substantial part. Sadly people want to try and simplify what's often a incredibly complex thing, and at no point from one camp or the other.

So in answer to your question ..


Are people predisposed to act a certain way, or do they grow up in a certain "environment" and become/change because of something like that?

.. my answer is 'neither', and to assume it's one or the other is negating what makes humanity or an individual what they are. Embrace the chaos in the universe .. it's inescapable.

[Diligence109]

age old argument... I'm with jango - I've always fallen in the "both" camp on the Nature v. Nurture argument. I sense that most people agree on this, to some extent.

[leica]

Both. However both are predetermined simply by the arrangement and energy of particles at the beginning of the universe.

[Project Blaze]

Huh. And what about mental illnesses? You can't exactly remedy that.

[jango]

What about it? The same applies tbh ..

[Project Blaze]

Nevermind. Don't even know why I bothered asking.

[jango]

Nevermind. Don't even know why I bothered asking.

hehe .. just my opinion, don't take offense .. just seems to me that the same can be said for mental illness - neither nature nor nurture, but often a combination of the two.

Apologies if my response seemed a little harsh.

[Project Blaze]

I see. I was just wondering about the whole issue, even though my personal standing is that the environment of the individuals influences their decision-making abilities more than being born with an illness.

I'm half-tired, so sorry if this doesn't make much sense. -_-

[EpsilonX]

i hate questions like this, where its either one or the other. In this case though, I think your environment and growing up and how you are raised plays a bigger part.

[Muffincat]

I remember watching a video in Psychology where they had this set of identical twins who had been separated at birth, and one of them had gone to a great, wonderful family and the other one had gone to a terrible one. I forget everything that happened and the details, but they both ended up with severe mental problems, despite their environment. So... Obviously that is one case, and I would definitely be someone on the "both of these things affect our development" train (which is where most scientists are, but it's interesting nonetheless (and probably says more for their specific problems being hereditary than for anything conclusive in this debate).

Anyway, both things contribute. But there's a lot of things that are family-based - for example, the chance of someone committing suicide is much higher if someone in their family committed suicide (though they don't think there's like a "depression" gene or anything), despite their environment. Though of course environment can help a lot.

I'm on a giant post spree today, apparently.

[chibimel]

idk..
i want to say that it can be genetic.. (my dad drinks, so therefore i drink, kinda thing)
but i believe that that kind of thinking is just an excuse to act a certain way.

sure there is a certain amount of genetics are involved.. (irish people tend to be a little feistier), that's how we get our generic sterotypes in certain races: black women tend to be loud. it's a fact.

however:

it is my personal belief that we are more impacted by our environment than our genetics. people arent born "leaning towards the dark side".. as romantic as that sounds.. instead we are influenced by the world.. or "other worldly" things such as spirits.

or you can scratch all that out and if someone as absolutely no reason to lets say.. become a serial killer.. he might be just mental.. in which case IS a genetic disorder.

[Project Blaze]

That's interesting about the serial killer part. Since, and I'm pretty sure this has been proven, if someone can't take anymore bull**** from people they tend to kill. Or maybe that can be separated into a different kind of killer...

[chibimel]

That's interesting about the serial killer part. Since, and I'm pretty sure this has been proven, if someone can't take anymore bull**** from people they tend to kill. Or maybe that can be separated into a different kind of killer...

every killer has got to be mentally disturbed in some way..
people in their right minds dont just wake up and decide to murder another human being for no reason.

but yes there is different kinds.

the killer who had an abusive history and is trying to somehow incorporate his rage for life in a twisted demented killing spree.. and then there is those tho for no apparent reason (but we now know they're just psycho) kill.
and finally there is the vigilante. the killer who kills for revenge. (im not sure if i spelled that right)

[Diligence109]

sure there is a certain amount of genetics are involved.. (irish people tend to be a little feistier), that's how we get our generic sterotypes in certain races: black women tend to be loud. it's a fact.

I'd lean towards calling these examples cultural predispositions rather than genetic proclivities, but that's just my two cents.




every killer has got to be mentally disturbed in some way..

careful with sweeping generalizations... you mention killing out of revenge in your post, a motive that I wouldn't necessarily chalk up as a "mental disorder." However, labeling things as a disorder or simple difference is all a red herring to the discussion over the influence of nature versus nurture - I still feel that, even when in the context of discussing someone's potential to murder (or even become a serial killer,) both nature (genetics, the alignment of the stars at birth, etc) and nurture (environmental conditions of upbriging, influence from family, culture, friends, spirits, other dimensions, the universe, etc) play significant distinguishing roles.

[leica]

there are too many factors to really argue anything in this thread

[jango]

there are too many factors to really argue anything in this thread

My thoughts exactly .. nothing is so easily explained away in a 'yes' or 'no' answer in these type of issues .. and often never will be.

[Diligence109]

there are too many factors to really argue anything in this thread

dammit Leica why do you have to go around making the best posts ever in every thread. You're making me and everyone else look bad.

(+rep)

[Dess]

lol. he's good like that.....

....................

I think the illness itself is genetic... but how you handle it is is determined my your environment or your general attitude, which I suppose is also determined by your environment.... like everyone has said.. there is no clear cut answer, but that is just my opinion.....

[chibimel]

you mention killing out of revenge in your post, a motive that I wouldn't necessarily chalk up as a "mental disorder."

i specifically said a vigilante ISNT a mental disorder. i said "FINALLY there is the vigilante. the killer who kills for revenge." nothing was said about the mental state of their mind.

i agree about the other part tho. i was trying to think of the right word.

[leica]

we're all ****ed up in some way or another
the end

[chibimel]

we're all ****ed up in some way or another
the end

that's very deep, leica. think of it all yourself? lol

[leica]

haha you know it

[Diligence109]

i specifically said a vigilante ISNT a mental disorder. i said "FINALLY there is the vigilante. the killer who kills for revenge." nothing was said about the mental state of their mind.

i agree about the other part tho. i was trying to think of the right word.

ah. Sorry about that then, your post was a little unclear... I didn't see that the word "finally" distinguished the vigilante as being clear of mental disorders, I just read that as you finishing your list.